ArticleJournal of pain research2026
Metabolic Syndrome and Low Back Pain: Evidence from Cross-Sectional and Mendelian Randomization Analysis.
Article in Journal of pain research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Metabolic syndrome (MetS) and low back pain (LBP) are major health concerns, but their relationship remains unclear. Components of MetS, such as abdominal obesity and hypertension, may contribute to musculoskeletal degeneration. This study investigated the association and causality between MetS and LBP. Methods: We analyzed 5,523 adults (≥20 years) from NHANES 1999-2004 with complete MetS and LBP data. MetS was defined using National Cholesterol Education Program's Adult Treatment Panel III (ATPIII), International Diabetes Federation (IDF), and "modified World Health Organization (mWHO) criteria". Weighted logistic regression and stratified analyses assessed associations. Mediation analysis examined the role of C-reactive protein (CRP), and Mendelian randomization (MR) using GWAS summary statistics tested causal effects of MetS components on LBP. Results: MetS prevalence was higher in participants with LBP (IDF: 41.0% vs 34.4%; ATPIII: 31.6% vs 25.8%; mWHO: 25.6% vs 21.2%). Fully adjusted models confirmed significant associations: IDF (OR = 1.27; 95% CI: 1.06-1.53), ATPIII (OR = 1.26; 95% CI: 1.05-1.50), mWHO (OR = 1.21; 95% CI: 1.03-1.42). CRP did not mediate these associations. MR analysis supported causal effects of hypertension (OR = 2.34; 95% CI: 1.38-3.97; FDR p = 0.002) and waist circumference (OR = 1.45; 95% CI: 1.34-1.57; FDR p < 0.001) on LBP, while other MetS components showed no causal links. Conclusion: MetS is associated with LBP across multiple definitions, with genetic evidence implicating abdominal obesity and hypertension. Improving metabolic health may be a promising strategy to reduce LBP burden.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.